Jump to content

Mtm Entrance Discussion


Le Chic
 Share

Recommended Posts

Imo we need a supporters association (whether it's called the Jags Trust or whatever is of less importance) and one good way of generating interest in a fans organisation is to offer its members exclusive events. So I see nothing wrong in a members only night.

 

That said however I think it is a bit petty to not accommodate bona fide fans if they come along under a genuine misapprehension. Anyway it seems to be the Thistle way these days, whether in the boardroom, amongst shareholders or amongst fans to make what should be something uncomplicated unfathomably complex.

 

M'lady has hit the nail on the head here. A bit of common sense might help bring fans together rather than create issues where they need not exist; those that were turned away would have not left with a negative impression of the Trust. As lennythistle says in his last post, McCall would have taken a 'more the merrier' approach.

 

Armand2's comment above makes it clear where the current problems with the image of the Trust lie:

 

"It's the self righteousness of the JT board members, two in particular, that irritates me."

 

Time for change ? :thinking:

 

Which business would turn away potential customers to make a point of principle ? Pigheadness will see JT membership fall again next year; we might not even need anyone on the door to keep people out...

Edited by sandy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I would have loved to have attended last night's event but I would rather burn a fiver than give it to the 'trust'

 

As for the 'trust' turning down peoples cash, isn't it a fiver to join the 'trust'? From that fiver, the 'trust' then have to pay for postal correspondance to the member for the year etc

 

If they can afford to refuse people paying a fiver for no return other than a one off entry into the Aitken Suite, then they must be in a fine financial state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My apologies to anyone who felt badly treated. That's obviously not the kind of feeling anyone wants to generate. If anything is clear from this thread, the admissions policy of future events should be made clearer to avoid any misunderstandings.

 

Trust membership for a year is ten pounds. Some might ask what you get for that, but one thing we can say is that it guarantees entry to exclusive events for members. There is an argument that some people might feel less inclined to pay the full membership if they thought they could get away with a smaller donation and in turn that generates less money for the club. That has to be balanced against how much money the Trust and Club would lose by turning down those donation offers. It's not quite as simple as saying the Trust lost twenty quid last night. Anyway, I'm open to hearing what people have to say on the subject.

 

I would say to those that refused to pay to join the Trust on principle that the Supporter's of Partick Thistle will never have the Association they want or deserve whilst people stand outside and refuse to participate. If you want change, then join and vote for change. If all the people on this forum who say they want change were to actively try and do something about it then we might be closer to having the Association you want. Yes, it's an old argument - but it's also true.

 

I'd like to thank Tom Hosie for compering last night and everyone else who came down and braved the crazy weather. I think a good night was had by all. Again, apologies to those that misunderstood the admission policy and I'm sorry you felt unable to join the Trust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Shame the jags didn't mean that much to you that you couldn't part with an extra 5 quid !!!

 

 

and just when I think The Jags Trust deserve some credit for their ethical principled stand on Proxy-gate, they manage to clutch contempt from the jaws of respect with this statement straight from The Allan Cowan School of Diplomacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Made the effort through the howling wind and rain. Advised we couldn't come in as we weren't members and weren't wanting to join. I have no interest in joining the trust but was interested to hear the thoughts of our manager so was happy to pay a token donation of £5. Apparently this was not ok. Instead of getting four times £5 and bar takings they got nothing and instead the Thai restaurant on Gt Western Road (excellent and very welcoming) got the money we had earmarked for the jags.

 

Glad to see the trust can afford to turn away income, mustn't be a dead duck after all.

 

Sorry to hear that a donation was refused, can understand why you wouldnt want to be pressurized into joining, i thought a donation would have been acceptable, sorry to hear about this :thumbdown:

Edited by Paolo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust membership for a year is ten pounds. Some might ask what you get for that, but one thing we can say is that it guarantees entry to exclusive events for members. There is an argument that some people might feel less inclined to pay the full membership if they thought they could get away with a smaller donation and in turn that generates less money for the club. That has to be balanced against how much money the Trust and Club would lose by turning down those donation offers. It's not quite as simple as saying the Trust lost twenty quid last night. Anyway, I'm open to hearing what people have to say on the subject.

 

My refusal to join the Trust and pay the fee was nothing to do with chancing my arm and trying to save a fiver. I have no interest whatsover in joining the Trust in its current form so the £10 that would be earned from my membership for this year is irrecoverable. However, they could have still made half of that fee by accepting my donation last night. Surely that makes business sense, to have your membership fees augmented by donations? So the club isn't receiving less money; they are in fact receiving more than they would have.

 

Ultimately, I find it ridiculous that the Trust saw fit to reject donations and deny Thistle fans, members or not, of supporting an event. Had the Aitken Suite been bursting at the seams and our presence was going to prevent members attending then fair enough. But it wasn't. There were about ten people there at the time.

 

The lack of diplomacy, business and common sense from that one individual last night is what the Trust is all about, I am afraid.

 

 

I would say to those that refused to pay to join the Trust on principle that the Supporter's of Partick Thistle will never have the Association they want or deserve whilst people stand outside and refuse to participate. If you want change, then join and vote for change. If all the people on this forum who say they want change were to actively try and do something about it then we might be closer to having the Association you want. Yes, it's an old argument - but it's also true.

 

I did buy into this when the Trust was reformed a few years ago and was a paid up member. However, the same people who ruined the Trust the last time have been allowed to monopolise the current structure again. Some of the people who have "represented" the fans have acted disgracefully, Adam Bell in particular. The guy was elected (I voted for him) and then vanished without trace. There have been a number of good, skilled people who have joined the Trust, buying into the belief you have outlined above, and have soon become totally disillusioned with the whole thing. That is no coincidence. The Jags Trust is rotten at the core, sabotaged by the same individuals and, although I admire your enthusiasm, there is nothing you'll be able to do until these people are permanently removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say to those that refused to pay to join the Trust on principle that the Supporter's of Partick Thistle will never have the Association they want or deserve whilst people stand outside and refuse to participate. If you want change, then join and vote for change. If all the people on this forum who say they want change were to actively try and do something about it then we might be closer to having the Association you want. Yes, it's an old argument - but it's also true.

 

I'm afraid that argument has been tried too many times.

 

I have previously rejoined the trust only for it to fall flat on it's face due to the reoccurance of the same problems over and over again.

 

The time has long since passed where enough is enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm afraid that argument has been tried too many times.

 

I have previously rejoined the trust only for it to fall flat on it's face due to the reoccurance of the same problems over and over again.

 

The time has long since passed where enough is enough.

 

Not long ago there was a proposal for some sort of vote on no confidence and calling of an EGM, was there not?

 

If I have my wording above correct, could BCG Jag let us know how many people 'signed up'? The trust may be rotten, however I agree with BCG that the trust is the only means of fan representation and the only way of resurrecting this duck is to get on the inside and stir things up. We have a fan who wants to do this on the trust board now, so surely fans could get behind him and try and rejuvenate the trust?

 

I know that I'm going off topic now, but if this vote of no confidence, or whatever the term was, was to bring an EGM about, what changes could it make? Would we only get a change in personnel, or could the constitution itself be reformed? We need a JT board that has been elected, with anyone wanting to join needing to be elected, with re-open nominations an alternative to anyone running for a position without opposition. For this we need people in the trust; if this happened and we moved on the deadwood, would those who keep repeating the term 'dead duck' want to either join the trust or even better stand for a position on a new board?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a member of the JT and have no real intention to become one, however the following analogy springs to mind.

 

Suppose I turn up at Firhill for the Falkirk game on the 19th. I declare at the booth that, rather than paying the displayed £17 entrance fee, I only pay £10 as a donation.

 

Would I have any justification coming on here afterwards complaining that the club had knocked back my £10, especially as I would have spent extra money on a pie and bovril at half-time? Don't think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a member of the JT and have no real intention to become one, however the following analogy springs to mind.

 

Suppose I turn up at Firhill for the Falkirk game on the 19th. I declare at the booth that, rather than paying the displayed £17 entrance fee, I only pay £10 as a donation.

 

Would I have any justification coming on here afterwards complaining that the club had knocked back my £10, especially as I would have spent extra money on a pie and bovril at half-time? Don't think so.

 

Totally incomparable.

 

What would be more comparable is you turn up at the ticket booth and ask to pay £17 for a single match and are informed that you must buy a season ticket otherwise you're not getting in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not long ago there was a proposal for some sort of vote on no confidence and calling of an EGM, was there not?

 

If I have my wording above correct, could BCG Jag let us know how many people 'signed up'? The trust may be rotten, however I agree with BCG that the trust is the only means of fan representation and the only way of resurrecting this duck is to get on the inside and stir things up. We have a fan who wants to do this on the trust board now, so surely fans could get behind him and try and rejuvenate the trust?

 

I know that I'm going off topic now, but if this vote of no confidence, or whatever the term was, was to bring an EGM about, what changes could it make? Would we only get a change in personnel, or could the constitution itself be reformed? We need a JT board that has been elected, with anyone wanting to join needing to be elected, with re-open nominations an alternative to anyone running for a position without opposition. For this we need people in the trust; if this happened and we moved on the deadwood, would those who keep repeating the term 'dead duck' want to either join the trust or even better stand for a position on a new board?

 

Given that there has been no movement on that front, I can only assume that BCG Jag never got enough names to force this through.

 

All I would achieve by joining the trust is to deposit £10 in their bank account (apologies for earlier in the thread as I thought membership was a fiver) It wouldn't change a thing as many better equipped people than me have tried and failed.

Edited by GrantB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally incomparable.

 

What would be more comparable is you turn up at the ticket booth and ask to pay £17 for a single match and are informed that you must buy a season ticket otherwise you're not getting in.

 

Not when entry to the game is clearly advertised as being by season ticket or paying £17.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that there has been no movement on that front, I can only assume that BCG Jag never got enough names to force this through.

 

All I would achieve by joining the trust is to deposit £10 in their bank account (apologies for earlier in the thread as I thought membership was a fiver) It wouldn't change a thing as many better equipped people than me have tried and failed.

 

I can't get away from the fact that this is a circular arguement tho Grant, the people that speak loudly about wanting change in the JT are the very people who refuse to join on principle. Id say to them...well much the same as Twinny has said really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not when entry to the game is clearly advertised as being by season ticket or paying £17.

 

Have you not read the preceding pages of this thread? It wasn't clearly advertised. It was open to debate and, since previous nights accepted donations from non-members, one would have expected last night be similar.

 

If you want to be so bloody pedantic, maybe you should join the Trust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that I'm going off topic now, but if this vote of no confidence, or whatever the term was, was to bring an EGM about, what changes could it make? Would we only get a change in personnel, or could the constitution itself be reformed? We need a JT board that has been elected, with anyone wanting to join needing to be elected, with re-open nominations an alternative to anyone running for a position without opposition. For this we need people in the trust; if this happened and we moved on the deadwood, would those who keep repeating the term 'dead duck' want to either join the trust or even better stand for a position on a new board?

 

The collection of names is to call an EGM and you'd need substantive business as well. A vote of no confidence is nothing unless it also includes definite actions - that could be anything from removing present incumbents to instructing the Trust Board on a specifc course of action.

 

However, there's so much nonsense talked about the Trust as if it's some kind of closed shop. There's been no contested positions because people aren't putting their names forward. If people don't put their name forward, then the same people will continue to be there until such times as they are able. The logic is breathtakingly simple.

 

If you don't want to put your name forward but still want to reserve the right to whinge on here then at least accept the fact that all you are doing is pissing in the wind. Don't mistake it for doing something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you not read the preceding pages of this thread? It wasn't clearly advertised. It was open to debate and, since previous nights accepted donations from non-members, one would have expected last night be similar.

 

If you want to be so bloody pedantic, maybe you should join the Trust.

 

Thanks for that valuable contribution to the discussion. Abuse is always a good fall-back position. :thumbsup2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Post 5 on this thread:

 

Cost for non members?

 

Post 6:

 

It's only open to Trust members, but you can join on the night.

 

Thank goodness that's cleared up.

 

 

 

So what stuff n bluster, moving plea's of skintness, potential signings, contract extensions, and usual MTMN script did Mccall enlighten you with? :thumbsup2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...